When I was a psychology student in college we studied a phenomenon known as “diffusion of responsibility.” This concept states that as more people are presented with a challenge, fewer see it as their responsibility to respond. At times few people, or no people, will respond because they feel someone else will or should take responsibility for the issue at hand. You see this phenomenon at work in a number of notorious cases of crime victims who are assaulted in public places in broad daylight and no one responds to their cries for help. In spite of, or as this concept would put it, because of, the number of people witnessing the event, no one person feels responsible to do something. Responsibility is “diffused” throughout the crowd, and consequently no one acts. Ironically, a victim has a greater chance of receiving help if an assault is seen by a single witness rather than a large crowd.
To me this helps explain one opportunity that small churches have for big impact. Prior to serving Life I served as a staff pastor in two megachurches, where one of the constant frustrations was finding ways to involve the anonymous 80% that were at worship on a weekend yet remained largely unknown to church leadership and one another. It was an odd paradox – on the one hand it felt as if we had unlimited resources to pay for projects or programs. We could often write a check that a small church could never dream of. But staffing those projects and programs was a different story. Getting people to feel personal responsibility and act on it was difficult, as that responsibility was diffused. On the whole we mobilized a large number of people, but as a percentage of the whole that number remained unsatisfying.
By contrast, in a small church responsibility is concentrated. There are fewer people to put in the “someone else will do it” category, and you experience less diffusion of responsibility. What’s more, church efforts have a more relational feel, as more often than not you know those involved in the program or project in question. Having a personal connection makes a huge difference in whether or not a person acts in response to a need.
The result?
Impact that remains personal. Each participant feels the reality that their contribution was a considerable part of the collective impact.
Impact that inspires sacrifice. If we are to do big things together, it requires me to prayerfully consider what is required of me personally.
Impact that contributes to spiritual formation. When we come off the sidelines and get into the adventure, we are changed. When responsibility is concentrated rather than diffused, more people get in the adventure in more significant ways, and consequently experience growth that is far more than cognitive.
